God, you are funny...

Oh, my dear Lord,
You obviously hate getting bored,
The God of the GAFs is strange to you,
You prefer a racing heart shouting הושענא.

Now thou shall cry,
Then I would love a רקוד לפני,
God of the paradox,
God framed in a box,
בזמירות נריע לו, we shall charm him.

The average Joe,
Chanting boruch mimkomo,
Is rather your’s a foe,
Generating less interest than a wiggling toe,
בזמירות נריע לו, we shall harm him.

Getting a kick,
When performing a trick,
The land of the free,
On the wrong side of the sea,
Honey and milk?
Search through the road of silk...

Only for a second you left your flock,
It somehow takes 2000 years to dock,
Perhaps I am a virgin,
Perhaps a prostitute,
Perhaps I’ve yet made a decision,
Perhaps I’m a multitude.

I understood and interpreted this poem to be a subtle rumination on the Problem of Evil, by utilizing some of the Theories of Humor. Namely, there’s the Incongruity Theory of Humor, which posits that humor is elicited through a previously subconsciously perceived mismatch between how something is portrayed to be and how it is in actuality. The simultaneous juxtaposition of the two in one’s mind and to one’s perception is what elicits laughter as a response. This is alluded to by “G-d of the Paradox”, meaning an allusion to the incongruity of an omnibenevolent G-d, who is at the same time both omnipotent and omniscient, allowing evil and harm to exist; as incongruity per se is the underlying foundation from which humor is derived.

This then dovetails with the Superiority Theory of Humor, which states that humor derives from an assertion of one’s perceived supremacy over the subject of the humor; schadefreude. In our case, this alludes to G-d’s dominance over His creations, which can become manifest in Humanity’s lowly state of suffering vis-à-vis the perfection and lofty state of G-d above these travails.

Finally, there’s the Relief Theory of Humor, which states that laughter is elicited from a release of tension held. As the theme of the poem is the suffering of Mankind, as we’ve posited, by alluding to humor in general it suggests at a hope for Humanity’s ultimate redemption, and thus relief, from this state and the tension its derivative Problem entails.

Additionally, I understood “G-d of the GAFs” to be an implication through wordplay to the G-d of the Gaps mentality in religion. Namely, that Maimonides had stated (MN 3:12-15) that nature itself, after having been created as such, provides a limit to what can be categorized as within the limits of “possible”. This thus places a (seeming) constraint on the extent to which G-d can intervene in the natural order, without impinging on (the definition of) His omnipotence. Now, this may be misconstrued as a theodicy which relies on a “G-d of the Gaps” paradigm. Meaning, that to the extent to which our knowledge about nature and the underlying mechanisms and rationality governing it extends we can eliminate G-d from that framework, and it is only to that which is beyond that domain that we are compelled to introduce G-d and ascribe to Him their reasoning. The Poet therefore juxtaposes this “Gaps” with “GAFs”, alluding to Humanity’s mental faculties limitations which leads us to this fallacious mindset.